Please see Governance Overview here.

Jump to a topic:

• Campaign Finance Reform

• Federal Concerns and Privacy

• Government Ethics

Campaign Finance Reform

No movement this week.

Federal Concerns and Privacy

By Becky Gladstone

We are following unsettling national issues affecting Oregon at a rapid pace, here are only a few.

From LWVUS, tell your members of Congress to oppose the SAVE Act. The "Save Act" would require voter registration names to match birth certificates, making voting harder (not entirely impossible) for women who changed their surnames when marrying, as many have. From Oregon’s Garrett Epps, constitutional law professor, “I share your frustration, but it's worth knowing that the Constitution explicitly authorizes Congress to pass regulations of federal elections as conducted in the states. Art. I § 4 ck 1: "The Times, Places and Manner of holding Elections for Senators and Representatives, shall be prescribed in each State by the Legislature thereof; but the Congress may at any time by Law make or alter such Regulations, except as to the Places of chousing Senators." From the Campaign Legal Center, What You Need to Know About the SAVE Act,.

Monitoring Federal Changes and Any Impacts on Oregon, Oregon Health Authority.

Greater Idaho movement wants a seat at the table is LWVOR commentary in the Oregon Capitol Chronicle, and other local versions of what was Pamplin Media. Watch for two bills, SJM 7 (inviting ID to begin border talks), and HB 3488 (a task force to document processes), neither scheduled for hearings yet.

Privacy concerns appeared in several bills this week, in three similar bills to provide privacy. Campaign committee workers could have the same protections as candidates and public servants for home addresses and phone numbers. We testified in support of HB 2710, which enables child abduction victims to enroll in Oregon’s Address Confidentiality Program. We did not testify to extending these protections for certain Oregon Liquor and Cannabis Commission permittees but did mention the similarities in our testimony in support of SB 224, which prohibits posting campaign committee addresses on the SoS website. 

Legislative Counsel noted that standards have not been adopted “for drafting measures that establish exemptions from disclosure of public records.” The League urges again for statute clarification during this legislative session. We need consistent privacy protections observing standardized personal information categories, adaptable to technological advances. We have supported numerous similar bills since 2017, all enrolled, each for a single type of public service or individual, amid growing concern from increasing harassment, doxing and personal threats.

• HB 2710, puts victims of child abduction onto the list of those able to join the Address Confidentiality Program (League testimony submitted and presented in support).

• SB 224, keep from publicly posting campaign committee workers’ home addresses (League testimony submitted and presented in support).

Most of the bills reported earlier here have not progressed yet. These are moving:

• HB 5017, the State Library budget bill, heard Feb 11, League testimony submitted and presented in support, as one of the 39 organizational partners listed.

• HB 2581, to coordinate expanded resiliency services with the State Resiliency Officer (SRO), passed a House floor vote 49 to 9, League testimony.

• HB 2341, to add veterans’ email addresses to shared information, passed a House floor vote with 58 in favor, two excused, League testimony.

• HB 5012, A public hearing is scheduled for Feb. 27 for this Oregon Judicial Department budget bill. We are researching and will submit comments in support.

Government Ethics

By Chris Cobey

No movement this week.

Interested in reading additional reports? Please see our Climate Emergency, Natural Resources, and Social Policy report sections.